“I Could Get Killed”: Violence Monitor Mary de Haas Defies MPs to Protect Sources

In a high-stakes confrontation before Parliament, renowned violence monitor Professor Mary de Haas drew a line in the sand, refusing to betray her confidential sources and warning she would rather end her testimony than compromise the ethical code that defines her work.

The scene was Parliament’s Ad Hoc Committee, which is investigating the deeply troubling infiltration of the police by a sophisticated criminal syndicate. De Haas, whose previous calls to disband the Political Killings Task Team (PKTT) placed her at the center of this firestorm, found her own credibility under the microscope.

A Clash of Principles and Power

The tension erupted when MPs pressed her to name the individuals who provided her with sensitive information about alleged corruption and abuse within the disbanded police unit. Her response was unwavering.

“It is my pleasure that you have taken this initiative, but I cannot give names,” De Haas stated firmly, grounding her refusal in a stark reality. “I live in a very violent province. I could get killed… I have to take every step to protect people.”

Even a compromise proposal to provide names in a closed, confidential session was rebuffed. She insisted that trained investigators from bodies like the Madlanga Commission were the proper channel for such disclosures, not a parliamentary committee.

Parliament Pushes Back

This stance triggered a sharp and divided response from the committee. Chairperson Lesetja Lekganyane questioned how they could act on unsubstantiated evidence, warning, “If you say you have evidence based on a source but refuse to name the source, how is the committee to proceed?”

The reaction from MPs split along political lines. Some, like the DA’s Glennys Breytenbach, defended her, stating that protecting sources is “fundamental to her work.” Others were less sympathetic.

MK party MP Sibonelo Nomvalo accused her of undermining Parliament’s authority, asserting, “You cannot pick and choose what you reveal.” The Patriotic Alliance’s Ashley Sauls took strong exception to her suggestion that she might stop testifying, reminding her of Parliament’s constitutional power to compel witnesses.

The Unmovable Messenger

Facing this pressure, De Haas remained an unmovable pillar of principle. “I am still a religious social worker,” she declared. “Betraying someone’s confidence would end my professional integrity.”

She positioned herself not as a sole possessor of secrets, but as a conduit. “I am just the messenger,” she said, pointing out that most of her information was already a matter of public record and that she had repeatedly reported her concerns through official channels.

The standoff highlights the critical tension between political oversight and the fragile, dangerous work of uncovering truth in a volatile environment. For Mary de Haas, her credibility and the safety of her sources are not negotiating points. As the inquiry continues, her defiance ensures that the ethics of source protection itself is now on trial alongside the allegations of police criminality.

{Source: IOL}

Follow Joburg ETC on Facebook, Twitter , TikTok and Instagram

For more News in Johannesburg, visit joburgetc.com